Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

results-report

Turn completed experiment analyses into an internal research report that explains findings, figures, limitations, and next actions. Reports connect evidence to decisions and can be saved locally or written into a linked Obsidian project.

OriginalShow the original description

This skill should be used when the user asks to "write an experiment report", "summarize experimental results", "do experiment retrospection", "write a results report", "写实验总结报告", "写实验复盘", or mentions turning completed experiment artifacts into a structured, decision-oriented research report. It assumes strict analysis should come from `results-analysis` first.

Works withObsidian

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Good for

  • Write a wrap-up report from completed experiment analyses
  • Explain figures and their implications for research decisions
  • Record negative results, limitations, and next actions
  • Save experiment reports in a linked Obsidian project

Files included (8)

  • SKILL.md5.5 KB
  • examples/example-results-report.md3.9 KB
  • references/decision-oriented-analysis.md542 B
  • references/EVIDENCE-PROPAGATION.md896 B
  • references/figure-interpretation.md628 B
  • references/report-naming.md1.0 KB
  • references/report-structure.md1.4 KB
  • references/statistical-completeness.md543 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Results Report

Write the complete post-experiment summary report after analysis artifacts are ready.

This skill is for the stage after results-analysis.

Role boundary

results-analysis does

  • strict statistics,
  • real figures,
  • figure interpretation scaffolding,
  • stats appendix.

results-report does

  • complete experiment wrap-up report,
  • decision-oriented narrative,
  • figure-by-figure interpretation inside a coherent structure,
  • limitations, failure cases, and next actions,
  • Obsidian write-back into Results/Reports/.

Do not replace strict analysis with confident prose. If the analysis bundle is missing, first identify the blocker and request or produce the missing bundle.

Default output

The default report is an internal research report, not manuscript prose.

It should be named as:

YYYY-MM-DD--{experiment-line}--r{round}--{purpose}.md

Example:

  • 2026-03-18--freezing--r03--transfer-summary.md
  • 2026-03-18--contrastive-adversarial--r02--ablation-report.md

The note title should be:

{Experiment Line} / Round {N} / {Purpose} / {YYYY-MM-DD}

Read references/report-naming.md before finalizing the filename or note title.

Required frontmatter

---
type: results-report
date: 2026-03-18
experiment_line: freezing
round: 3
purpose: transfer-summary
status: active
source_artifacts:
  - analysis-output/analysis-report.md
  - analysis-output/stats-appendix.md
linked_experiments:
  - Experiments/Freezing-Study.md
linked_results:
  - Results/Freezing-vs-Adapter.md
---

Default report structure

The report must include all sections below.

  1. Executive Summary
  2. Experiment Identity and Decision Context
  3. Setup and Evaluation Protocol
  4. Main Findings
  5. Statistical Validation
  6. Figure-by-Figure Interpretation
  7. Failure Cases / Negative Results / Limitations
  8. What Changed Our Belief
  9. Next Actions
  10. Artifact and Reproducibility Index

Read references/report-structure.md before writing.

Workflow

1. Confirm the report object

Lock these fields first:

  • date,
  • experiment line,
  • round,
  • purpose,
  • linked experiment note,
  • linked durable result note if one already exists.

If round is unknown, do not silently invent a semantic round. Use r00 only as a temporary placeholder and state that it should be normalized later.

2. Read the strict analysis bundle

Minimum required inputs:

  • analysis-report.md
  • stats-appendix.md
  • figure-catalog.md
  • actual figures, if available

If these are missing, either generate them first with results-analysis or explicitly state which claims cannot be supported.

3. Write the report as a decision object

This report is not a transcript of outputs.

Each section must answer a real question:

  • What did we test?
  • What changed numerically?
  • What is actually supported?
  • What failed or remains uncertain?
  • What should we do next?

Read references/decision-oriented-analysis.md for the expected reasoning depth.

4. Interpret figures inside the report

Do not only attach figures.

For each main figure:

  • introduce why it is included,
  • state the key observation,
  • explain the supported interpretation,
  • explain the decision implication.

Read references/figure-interpretation.md and references/statistical-completeness.md as needed.

5. Choose the write target explicitly

If the current repo is bound to an Obsidian project knowledge base:

  • create or update Results/Reports/{report-name}.md,
  • link back to the relevant Experiments/ note,
  • update the matching canonical Results/ note when a durable conclusion is now supported,
  • append a short trace to today's Daily/ note,
  • update .claude/project-memory/<project_id>.md.

If the repo is not bound:

  • write the report as a local markdown artifact in the requested output location or next to the analysis bundle,
  • keep the same filename contract,
  • explicitly say that no Obsidian write-back was attempted.

Use obsidian-project-memory conventions only for bound repos. Internal experiment reports belong in Results/Reports/, not Writing/.

6. End with explicit next actions

The report must end with operational decisions, for example:

  • stop a weak branch,
  • schedule one missing ablation,
  • promote a stable finding into manuscript-facing writing,
  • update the active plan.

Required quality bar

  • The report must be dateable, searchable, and attributable to one experiment line and one round.
  • The report must cite actual evidence from the analysis bundle.
  • The report must include negative results when they matter.
  • The report must separate stable conclusion from tentative interpretation.
  • The report must say what changed in project belief and what should happen next.

Reference files

Load only what is needed:

  • references/report-structure.md
  • references/report-naming.md
  • references/figure-interpretation.md
  • references/statistical-completeness.md
  • references/decision-oriented-analysis.md
  • references/EVIDENCE-PROPAGATION.md
  • examples/example-results-report.md

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

a1

FreeSummary

Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

a2

FreeSummary

Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

a5

FreeSummary

Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.

  • Clarifying philosophical foundations for a research proposal
  • Explaining why the chosen research methods fit the study
  • Drafting a statement about the researcher's position
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

academic-paper

FreeSummary

Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.

  • Draft a full paper from a detailed outline
  • Review argument and citation quality chapter by chapter
  • Check terminology and argument flow across chapters
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7KUpdated Oct 20, 2026

See all skills by brycewang-stanford

Report a problem with this skill